🐈
» Forums » Freelancers » Re: The client is harassing and bullying me o...
Page options
caramel11
Community Member

The client is harassing and bullying me online

I have reported a client last week and filed a dispute to upwork to settle things out. I've got a contract for 100 USD for a 12-page research proposal which I submitted, revised based on the comments and re-submitted to him. After I submitted the revised draft, he canceled/terminated the contract and offered me to pay 10 USD in PayPal instead. I did not agree and instead filed a dispute and reported the client to upwork. The upwork specialist said that the client has committed circumvention but refuse to provide further details on the outcome of the investigation. Now, the client is harassing me online, threatening to call the police here in the country where I'm staying right now and even threatened to call my university where I am taking my Ph.D.  While these are empty threats and I know that he can't move forward with it, I found these legitimate forms of harassment. I'm just a bit frustrated with upwork for failure to protect the freelancers from these kinds of intimidation. Those messages were sent on the "dispute" dialogue box, yet no one has intervened. Days before the contract was terminated by the client, I have already contacted upwork and reported the client but they again failed to act. I'm not sure what to do with this, but clearly, the client is intimidating and harassing me to back down from the dispute and get his money back. Hope someone can help me in identifying further actions I can take to stop the client from harassing me. 

70 REPLIES 70


Steven S wrote:

 

In some countries, $100 represents an standard income of a month or two. Paying for arbitration at $291 with no guarantee of getting it back, is seriously endangering the welfare of a freelancer and his family. This is no joke and I don't think you have taken it at all seriously.


Unfortunately that is what it costs. That is all there is to it. Upwork can't make it any cheaper for poorer freelancers, unless they subsidised the arbitration even more, and do so for that demographic that is least profitable anyway. Arbitration costs each party (Upwork, the client and the freelancer) $ 291.

 

Whether that is "fair" in the overall scheme of "world fairness" isn't really the issue. If freelancers want to play on a global platform they can't pick and choose which part of "global" they want.

 

Freelancing is running a business. Running a business comes with costs and risks.

 

 

 

There is apparently not much Upwork can do to help small project freelancers after a problem develops with an unscrupulous client, but Upwork could help all freelancers avoid working with habitually hard-to-work with clients by providing more information about them, including:

 

1) What is their average rating for freelancers on previous projects

2) What percentage of their past projects have they cancelled

3) What percentage of their past projects have they closed before completion

4) What percentage of their past projects have they demanded refunds on

5) On what percentage of their past projects have gone to mediation

6) On what percentage of their past projects have they gone to arbitration

 

If Upwork can't weed out bad actors, at least let freelancers decide for themselves what kind of client they want to work for.

Petra, you are correct, but we are veering away from the original point at hand.  The point is that arbitration is not working for some freelancers and the only single point I made (a long time ago) is this : Upwork haven't thought the arbitration through yet.  

 

If you want to be blunt about, I cannot stop you.  But my point remains.  The AAA is an arbitration body with a totally different set of standards to the work Upwork offers on its platform.  As such, its a first step towards creating a resolution, but its by no means a suitable one.

 

The adr.org website lists the fees for arbitration.  The $800-900 bracket is for arbitration for amounts up to $75,000. 

 

Please guys, get serious here.  Upwork provides a great platform, but it really needs to address this.


Steven S wrote:

 The point is that arbitration is not working for some freelancers


No, it may not be working for some freelancers, but nothing works for everyone. Such is life.

 

The first few years I was on this platform there wasn't any Escrow at all, or arbitration, or dispute assistance. You picked your clients carefully and managed your contracts and clients just as carefully.

 

Maybe people are getting reckless these days, beause they feel safe with a protection that later turns out to be not quite what they thought.

 

Both disputes and arbitration are and should be a very last resort when things have failed.

I've never had a dispute of any sort. It may well happen one day, but to be honest the fact that I have been paid for every minute I have worked since joining Upwork means that as a percentage of the whole picture, if I needed to go to arbitration, it would be a drop in the ocean that is my freelancing business.

 


Steven S wrote:

 

How about we set the cost of arbitration at $0.01?


This is ridiculous.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Steven S wrote:

Petra, you are correct, but we are veering away from the original point at hand.  The point is that arbitration is not working for some freelancers and the only single point I made (a long time ago) is this : Upwork haven't thought the arbitration through yet.  

 

If you want to be blunt about, I cannot stop you.  But my point remains.  The AAA is an arbitration body with a totally different set of standards to the work Upwork offers on its platform.  As such, its a first step towards creating a resolution, but its by no means a suitable one.

 

The adr.org website lists the fees for arbitration.  The $800-900 bracket is for arbitration for amounts up to $75,000. 

 

Please guys, get serious here.  Upwork provides a great platform, but it really needs to address this.


Steven, the point you repeatedly fail (or refuse) to grasp is that Upwork doesn't (and can't) DO arbitration. Upwork arranges for a qualified outside arbitrator. As you've noted, arbitrators charge several hundred dollars to resolve matters of less than $75,000. An arbitrator, who will typically have extensive training in alternative dispute resolution and often be an attorney, retired judge, or some other professional with extensive negotiation experience, will not work for a few dollars simply because the amount in question is small. They cost what they cost. 

 

Imagine that an outside client with whom you had no prior history came to you and said, "I need you to do the exact same job and invest the exact same amount of time you would on any other project, but it's a low-value project for me, so I need you to do it at 1/100,000 of your regular rate." That is precisely what you are asking of the arbitrator with your penny proposal.

 

The alternative would be that Upwork could shoulder the whole nearly-$900 fee for arbitration for every $50 job someone wanted to dispute, losing several hundred dollars on every arbitrated project regardless of outcome. How long do you think the company would stay in business that way?


No matter how many times you say Upwork hasn't thought it through, the true answer will remain that Upwork thought it through in the context of the legal and practical realities and you want them to think it through in a magical fairyland where arbitrators work for free so things can be fair for you.


Steven S wrote:

Jeniffer, I am going to address your remarks in a general way and I am hoping that if you haven't "got it" yet, perhaps you will understand a little bit more.

 

The minimum wage in the USA in general is $7.50 and increasing.   A job waiting tables or cleaning dishes, brings in maybe $60 a shift.  Now, earlier Preston H. [edited due to community rules] refered to a "small job" of maybe $100 or $150 to try out a client and in his context, he is right.  Its a small job. He is skilled and not earning minimum wage.  perhaps his hourly income is of that magnitude.

 

In some countries, $100 represents an standard income of a month or two.  Paying for arbitration at $291 with no guarantee of getting it back, is seriously endangering the welfare of a freelancer and his family.  This is no joke and I don't think you have taken it at all seriously.

 

One last comment - the town that Upwork has its HQ in : the median income is $34,000 per annum.  Everything in its context. 

 


That is called globalization. Where I live the average minimum salary for sectors with an agreement is  approximately 21 USD per hour, median income in $41,000 and cost of living in Norway is 46.08% higher than in United States. So what? The clients do not care where you live and how much money you need every month just to pay rent. They care about the rate you are offering and the result you deliver.

Trust me, I am living the other end of globalization competing against freelancers that can offer much lower rates. So do not lecture me on that and take the discussion off topic.

Once again you are getting personal and not addressing the issue.

 

But how about we all agree that globaliation is a good thing and instead of working at the highest tariff, we work on the lowest.

 

How about we set the cost of arbitration at $0.01?


Steven S wrote:

Once again you are getting personal and not addressing the issue.

 

But how about we all agree that globaliation is a good thing and instead of working at the highest tariff, we work on the lowest.

 

How about we set the cost of arbitration at $0.01?


Pass, sweaty. I like money too much.


Steven S wrote:

Once again you are getting personal and not addressing the issue.

 

But how about we all agree that globaliation is a good thing and instead of working at the highest tariff, we work on the lowest.

 

How about we set the cost of arbitration at $0.01?


Dear Steven,

 

I gladly pay $0.01 to end this discussion here.

 

Pointing out that you cannot only focus on an average income of $100 but also have to consider the other end of $41000 is not getting personal but puts "Everything in its context".

"But how about we all agree that globaliation is a good thing and instead of working at the highest tariff, we work on the lowest."

Globalization can only be a good thing if their is no exploitation. Keep in mind that freelancers from low-cost countries can exploit this as a competitive advantage.

 

When you signed up you agreed to this:

YOU UNDERSTAND THAT BY USING THE SITE OR SITE SERVICES AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE, YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF SERVICE, INCLUDING THE ARBITRATION PROVISION IN SECTION 14 OF THIS AGREEMENT (SUBJECT TO YOUR RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF THE ARBITRATION PROVISION AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 14). IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT THE TERMS OF SERVICE IN ITS ENTIRETY, YOU MUST NOT ACCESS OR USE THE SITE OR THE SITE SERVICES AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE EXCEPT AS PERMITTED BY THE SITE TERMS OF USE.

 

If you do not agree to the ToS you know what to do. And yes, that last sentence is personal and addressing you.

Its sad that are making this personal.  


Steven S wrote:

Once again you are getting personal and not addressing the issue.

 

But how about we all agree that globaliation is a good thing and instead of working at the highest tariff, we work on the lowest.

 

How about we set the cost of arbitration at $0.01?


Fine. Where will the other $290.99 come from that is due the arbitrator?

 

Small-scale, low-earning freelancers are more vulnerable to unscrupulous clients because they lack the cash flow to pursue deadbeats and recover what's owed them. That is a fact of life, on global platforms and in the brick-and-mortar world. UW does not exist, nor does it profess, to solve that problem. The escrow system offers a measure of protection to both client and FL as long as they both use it as designed. But it's not bulletproof. 

 

My own opinion is that the best way to protect FLs from unfortunate and costly blunders is to stop admitting anyone who cannot demonstrate the wherewithal to successfully manage themselves as a small business which includes effectively vetting clients, reading the fine print on everything (e.g. how to submit work and get paid), managing their work and the client relationships, etc. It doesn't matter whether someone is billing $5/hr or $500/hr, they will not succeed unless they are truly ready to freelance. Which brings us back to my favorite dead horse: the need for a meaningful readiness test.

Yes, Phyllis, it does make sense that Upwork would do better to prevent as many disputes as possible, rather than having to deal with them after the fact.

 

As you say, "effectively vetting clients" is a very important skill for a successful freelancer. In order to facilitate that vetting, Upwork should provide a lot more information about clients' records of activity on Upwork. The current simplistic, algorithm-based client "rating" system with just one to five stars is not much help in that respect.


Will L wrote:

Yes, Phyllis, it does make sense that Upwork would do better to prevent as many disputes as possible, rather than having to deal with them after the fact.

 

As you say, "effectively vetting clients" is a very important skill for a successful freelancer. In order to facilitate that vetting, Upwork should provide a lot more information about clients' records of activity on Upwork. The current simplistic, algorithm-based client "rating" system with just one to five stars is not much help in that respect.


I would never argue that there isn't vast room for improvement in practically every aspect of this platform. That said, I believe that most of the vetting occurs (or at least, should occur) while scanning job posts and deciding whether or not to pursue them, and then during any interaction with the prospective client prior to executing a contract. It requires experience and a minimal level of business savvy and professional experience. I don't believe UW could create a substantial substitute for that, and attempting it would make it unacceptably cumbersome and intrusive for clients to want to use the platform. I believe that UW could create an effective readiness test for FLs and stop letting anybody in who can fog a mirror (and wants to target a skill set that's in demand that week). I'd be willing to bet the least prepared FLs account for the most disputes. That's not to say the involved clients are blameless, but unscrupulous/clueless/flaky clients are fact of life and minimizing the damage they can do is part of what every successful FL needs to know how to do. And the clueless nubes definitely suck up most of the CS bandwidth.

 

Will, thank you for your contributions,   I don't think clients are vetted very well at all.   As a matter of course, I always compare the country of origin to the stated timezone and sometimes come up short.  Also, the home page is designed to get a client started as quickly as possible and this can happen without even specifying a payment method.

 

Client vetting is in my opinion, a weak point.  Which of course brings us back to the issue of non-payment.  

 

It is not true that all freelancers are angels.  But its important to ensure a level playing field for all participants and what has come out of this conversation, as well as others, is that its not leval at all.

Thank you Phyllis for your contribution.  I agree that we cannot be subsidised and that freelancers need to run a business.  Its a reallity also that Upwork have outsourced the arbitration.  

 

But its not true that they have to (unless the financial regulations of handling escrow demand it)  And its not true that they have to outsource to an American arbitration organization.  I think its more an expectation of what should be done.  


Steven S wrote:

 

But its not true that they have to (unless the financial regulations of handling escrow demand it) 

 

Which numerous people have already told you that they do.

Tiffany - Upwork have never told me any such thing.

 

if it's your opinion that arbiration is legally binding and If you work for, or are affiliated to Upwork, I think you need to disclose this fact.

Steven,

 

An arbitration award is not legally binding on its own, but going to a judge and getting an enforceable judgment that is enforceable is not difficult:

 

https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/publications/Thomson-Jura-Craig-Kostecka-Enf...

 

If I remember correctly, Upwork will comply with an arbitration award within a couple of days of the arbitrator's decision, so involving a judge is not necessary for the winning party.

 

Will, I appreciate your constructive comments.


Steven S wrote:

Tiffany - Upwork have never told me any such thing.

 

if it's your opinion that arbiration is legally binding and If you work for, or are affiliated to Upwork, I think you need to disclose this fact.


Steven, arbitration being legally binding has not been a topic of conversation here thus far, and certainly is not related in any way to anything that I've said. 

 

That said, if you enter into a contract in which you agree to abide by the terms of arbitration, then of course it is legally binding--complying with it is one of the terms of your contract. Someone else (Will?) mentioned converting to judgment, but that's a separate issue. A properly formed contract  is itself legally binding.

 

I do not work for Upwork. That does not alter the binding nature of contracts.


Steven wrote:

 Its a reallity also that Upwork have outsourced the arbitration.  

 

But its not true that they have to


Where did you get that from? Again, you know what, exactly, about the legal framework governing US Escrow Agents?

 

You make bold statements. Back them up.

 

You call people (including a lawyer based in the relevant jurisdiction) liars. Yet so far there hasn't been a hint of a fact from you. Just vague, fluffy, magical unicorn, rhetoric.

 


Steven wrote:
And that is really what this is about, because its impossible to get paid $100 if the client refuses to pay.

 

Nonsense. It is not "impossible."

Personal comments again.  

 

Is it possible to stick to a neutral topic of conversation and avoid hostility?

 

 

No, Steven. That isn't possible for everyone. Smarmy and condescending are where some people think they need to be with their commentary.

 

Such is life on the interweb...


Steven S wrote:

Personal comments again.  

 

Is it possible to stick to a neutral topic of conversation and avoid hostility?

 

 


Pro tip: Your choosing to take things personally is what makes it fun to write and read sarcastic comments. There is always a peanut gallery following threads like this, so much more entertaining than "How can I tell if my profile is approved?" and "I did a job for a client who was in too much of a hurry to set up a contract and now I'm sad because I haven't been paid," and "My client was mean to me, what should I do?"

At least I am providing entertainment for the masses.  

 

But seriously, this thread was started by Melvin who had a $100 job.   He was not paid, bullied and is feeling the lack of recourse.  And that is really what this is about, because its impossible to get paid $100 if the client refuses to pay.   

 

One suggestion was : pay the $291 fee and hope that the client backs down.  But that moves into a branch of maths called "game theory", or "what if?".   How about, we focus on the problem of Melvin (who lives in Australia) who did his job and now wants to get paid for it.    None of the current responses I have read, actually suggest a realistic way around the problem.  I don't have a better answer at this point, but then its not my platform or business model.

Solving this particular problem--which is intrinsic to freelancing--is not and has never been a component of UW's business model. You keep insisting that it should be, yet offer no practical means of addressing it. Meanwhile, several veteran FLs with firsthand experience in dispute situations on UW have offered on-point, practical advice and CS is assisting Melvin, said assistance characterized by him as "professional and extremely helpful". 

 

You can't risk-proof freelancing. There's a reason operating a small business is often referred to as a "business venture."

Phyllis G wrote:

Solving this particular problem--which is intrinsic to freelancing--is not and has never been a component of UW's business model. You keep insisting that it should be, yet offer no practical means of addressing it. Meanwhile, several veteran FLs with firsthand experience in dispute situations on UW have offered on-point, practical advice and CS is assisting Melvin, said assistance characterized by him as "professional and extremely helpful". 

 

You can't risk-proof freelancing. There's a reason operating a small business is often referred to as a "business venture."

 

Or sometimes, as often happens with newcomers to Upwork, as business misadventures. 


Phyllis, I assume that you must have inside information on this, which clrealy I do not.  I would be very pleased if the original proble was sorted out.

 

I don't see why expecting at the very least, a level playing field, is asking too much.  here's a quote for you:

In economics, Gresham's law is a monetary principle stating that "bad moneydrives out good".

 

Or to put it in our terms : whoever cheats second, loses.  The only way to prevent cheaters from getting away with all the time, is to have a level playing field where they will get caught out.  Preston H put it very well earlier : payment must be made;  if the work is shoddy, the contract can be stopped.  At the very least, we freelancers expect to get paid for our work.  Why isn't it Upwork's business model, that we are all treated fairly? Are you speaking personally or as an Upwork rep?

BojanS
Community Manager
Community Manager

Hi All,

 

A few posts have been edited or removed from this thread for Community Guidelines.

 

I would just like to ask you to keep the conversation professional and avoid personal attacks.

 

Thank you.

~ Bojan
Upwork


Steven S wrote:

Phyllis, I assume that you must have inside information on this, which clrealy I do not.  I would be very pleased if the original proble was sorted out.

 

I don't see why expecting at the very least, a level playing field, is asking too much.  here's a quote for you:

In economics, Gresham's law is a monetary principle stating that "bad moneydrives out good".

 

Or to put it in our terms : whoever cheats second, loses.  The only way to prevent cheaters from getting away with all the time, is to have a level playing field where they will get caught out.  Preston H put it very well earlier : payment must be made;  if the work is shoddy, the contract can be stopped.  At the very least, we freelancers expect to get paid for our work.  Why isn't it Upwork's business model, that we are all treated fairly? Are you speaking personally or as an Upwork rep?


I have no access to "inside information" on anything, nor is it clear why you think I do.

 

I don't know why UW's business model is not built on a mission to ensure your definition of fair treatment. You need to ask UW. I would guess it's because they are trying to run a profitable business. (Not that it's evident from some of their recent choices about platform functionality, but that's a different thread.) 


Steven S wrote:

Jeniffer, I am going to address your remarks in a general way and I am hoping that if you haven't "got it" yet, perhaps you will understand a little bit more.

 

In some countries, $100 represents an standard income of a month or two.  Paying for arbitration at $291 with no guarantee of getting it back, is seriously endangering the welfare of a freelancer and his family.  This is no joke and I don't think you have taken it at all seriously.

 


Assuming standard income reflects the standard living costs. Everybody on Upwork has the same chances no matter where they are. If one freelancer needs $200 per months to pay all the bills while another freelancer needs $3500, which one is more likely to have the extra $291 for arbitration?

Latest Articles
Featured Topics
Learning Paths